The JAK Bank: Interest Free Full Reserve Banking!

The JAK Bank provides us with an important model for interest free saving and lending. It is a fully fledged alternative for interest bearing Full Reserve Banking.

The Swedish JAK Bank is based on a Danish concept from 1931. It started in 1965 and obtained a banking licence in 1997. It’s a cooperative bank owned by its members, of which there are about 38,000. JAK stands for Jord Arbete Kapital, which is Swedish for Land, Labor and Capital, the factors of production.

The Jak bank basically works as we expect a bank to function: it takes in deposits from its members and lends these out to other members.

Loans are backed by either collateral or guarantors. The JAK has very low default rate, for which there are several reasons. Interest free loans are obviously much easier to repay. Members are far more committed than ‘customers’. And JAK requires its members to save to obtain the right to borrow. Savers are known to be good debtors.

How can it be interest free? Well, very simple: instead of interest savers are rewarded with interest free loans for themselves.

Most people would rather have interest free loans than interest on savings, especially if they actually did the math.

To obtain the right to a loan, new members must have saved for at least six months. During this time savers acquire ‘saving points’. Saving points are a product of savings and the Savings Factor. JAK members can choose from 6, 12 and 24-month deposit accounts which represent the advance notice required to make a withdrawal. The longer term deposits are associated with a higher ‘Savings Factor’: 0,7 for a six month deposit, 0,9 for a 24 month deposit.

Saving 1 Krona for 1 month is 1 ‘Saving Point’ times the Saving Factor. 1 Saving Point is the right to borrow 1 Krona for one month.

This is the simple mechanism of the JAK bank. In this way people are basically organized to provide themselves with loans based on their future savings and income. Exactly as it should be.

The main problem with the JAK bank is that it has problems financing itself. Members are not willing to pay high fees. New members pay 200 Kronor (about 22 euro) and yearly membership fees are 200 Kronor also. This is only just about enough to pay for its operations.

Conclusion
The JAK model is important, both in a debt free currency environment, for instance Social Credit, and in an interest free Mutual Credit environment.

Full Reserve Banking is promoted by many monetary reformers. The problem is that it does not end the wealth transfer from poor to rich through Usury.

The JAK bank provides a very effective mechanism to create non usurious Full Reserve Banking and thus deserves more attention.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

JAK actually does charge interest; they just call it “loan cost” (‘lånekostnad”) instead and pretend it’s not interest. The nominal rate is currently 3 per cent per annum, i.e. considerably higher than regular banks, and to that you need to add the (not easily calculated) cost of mandatory interest-free saving.

By borrowing from their own publicly owned banks, governments could eliminate their interest burden altogether. This has been demonstrated elsewhere with stellar results, including in Canada, Australia, and Argentina among other countries.

In 2011, the US federal government paid US$454 billion in interest on the federal debt – nearly one-third the total $1,100 billion paid in personal income taxes that year. If the government had been borrowing directly from the Federal Reserve – which has the power to create credit on its books and now rebates its profits directly to the government – personal income taxes could have been cut by a third.

By not borrowing at all, but living within their means and limiting expenses to revenue (not to mention eliminating socialist programmes, and further reducing expenses), the government of Canada could completely eliminate the interest burden, without inflating the money supply —not to the liking of little satanist ellen brown

To whom was the $454 billion paid ? one half of those bonds are held by teachers federation, public employees union, federal pension plan –not bankers, not chinese; recepients of government cheques are the beneficiaries of federal indebtedness

Who are the large shareholders of large banks ? the above 3 suspects; once again, recepients of government cheques are beneficiaries of exhorbitant bank profits

the left-over hippy (and her maggot-infested groupies) should consider this; perhaps write an article on it (that the whole pension system is built on an ever increasing national debt and interest revenue; where else is pansion money invested ? Esso, shell, BP, GE, Monsato, Archer-daniel, microsoft ?)

Hello Anthony. Excellent blog. This JAK bank is an interesting idea and certainly far better than the usurious banking system we currently have to suffer! I awoke few years ago to the corrupt nature of our debt-based money-system where a private banking cartel have usurped the sovereign right of the people to issue a nation’s money-supply, and issuing it as an interest-bearing debt……to be honest this shocked and appalled me! Reading Michael excellent book The Grip of Death really brought home the insanity of the current banking/financial system and the world we live in!

Just hope enough people wake-up to stop the bankster’s feudal New World Order plans!

Excellent blog. I have to say it is most interesting and informative. Few years ago i woke up to the corrupt financial debt-based money-system where a private banking cartel has usurped the power to issue a nation’s (Britain in my case) money as an interest-bearing debt, and I was shocked and appalled! The first book I read on the subject was Michael Rowbotham’s excellent book ‘The Grip of Death’ a real eye-opener, It made so much sense all the problems which couldn’t apparently be solved because ‘there wasn’t enough money’ now I knew why?

Hope the nefarious bunch of Zionist bankster criminals can be stopped in their drive for a New World Order?

JAK Bank: Interest-free Full Reserve Banking
Jct: Yes, how stupid to limit your chips in your game to old chips saved when you could have brand-new interest-free zero-reserve poker chips. How stupid to run a piggy bank dependent on finding scarce funds for the loans when you could run a casino-style bank dependent on only the collateral for the loans. How stupid an interest-free model is a piggy bank model compared to a casino bank model? Really stupid those JAK people.

John, I agree, there is no need to limit the creation of new money as long as the creator (borrower) backs the new money with collateral and adequate credit-ability.

In this scenario, we are simply “changing the state” of wealth like fluids change from a solid state (ice) to a liquid state (money). A person’s equity (assets) can be converted to chips (money) just like in a casino.

By requiring 100% reserves, we are artificially limiting the amount of new money totally separate from the equity that it represents. And worse, we are lobotomizing banking by eliminating the ability to create new money in the first place.

There may be a need for money recyclers but that is no substitute for the need to create new money. After all, virtually all money in our system is temporary – perishable like fruits and vegetables. Money must be routinely created at a rate at least equal to the amount that is being destroyed (debt repayment).

See my earlier post (below) for at least one way to accomplish 0% loans by banks (new money created in the process).

Yes, new money should be created if you use debt based money system. But if you use Silvio Gesell’s money system, witch have sent money into circulation and destroys them with demurage tax there should be no need to create more money except to compensate demurage tax and to cover expansion of economy.

I disagree, there’s no need for any backing. Everybody should be able to issue credit money, for example, using Ripple. Abundant money doesn’t produce basic interest neither. The current situation is different, only banks can issue credit money, and the state enforces that is universally equivalent issued by central banks money. The state enforces a monopoly and then it gives it away to the banking cartel. We should remove that monopoly. States should get endebted to issue money, but we should be able to chose our currency so that we aren’t completely exposed to central bank/state issuing excesses. State issued money doesn’t need to be backed by anything but taxes and responsible issuing. Of course, they should have demurrage.
Demurrage cash monies and mutual credit interest free monies will be superior to gold in a free market because they distribute resources more efficiently. Interest is nothing but an economic rent that also causes cycles.

Hi, we’re starting something similar in Spain. Before having a banking license, we’re going to collaborate with an ethical bank. Not sure if Triodos or Fiare, because I’m not very involved in that project. You may want to launch some questions in our mailing list. If the more active organizers don’t write English I can act as an interpreter:

I think Jak is promising because I doubt all the demand for credit could be satisfied with newly created money, especially if the credit is interest free. The money supply must not be allowed to grow beyond levels of price stability.

That’s why I believe we should probably be looking at a hybrid system and the JAK bank seems like a good way of recycling already created cash for further credit needs.

There are outfits that provide interest-free loans. Here are a couple I have come across:

One is The Hebrew Free Loan Society (HFLS), and they say about themselves: …. a Jewish microfinance organization that has promoted economic self-sufficiency through interest-free lending since 1892.
We provide capital to those who otherwise would not have access to credit or for whom interest payments, such as those on credit cards, would be prohibitive. Our loans are always interest-free: Borrowers pay back the exact amount we lend out. There is no fine print.

Our loans are intended to help a borrower become economically self-sufficient. They are structured to be repaid over a period that ranges from 20 months to 10 years, depending on the type of loan.

Each loan is secured by co-signers who guarantee the loan will be repaid if the borrower defaults. Having guarantors is critical to how we maintain a repayment rate of more than 99 percent.

My comment: not bad eh?

And then there is The Jewish Free Loan Association of Los Angeles who say they offer interest-free loans on a non-sectarian basis to individuals and families whose needs are urgent and who may not qualify through normal financial resources. Interest-free loans instead of charity fill an important gap in our social system by promoting self-sufficiency with dignity.

JFLA affirms the ancient biblical requirement for interest-free lending by offering assistance to people in need with the goal of helping them to lead more rewarding and responsible lives.

There are also others.

So, it is possible and it works. If the Hebrew Free Loan Society has manged to keep it up since 1892, then others can do it too.

Let us learn from the best and the successful whoever they may be…. 😉

I believe there are people with a heart for others who is willing to put up capital for a venture like this. Of course providing it is manged properly and that the money actually does somebody who needs it some good.

This bank can operate because the government of Sweden is providing a stable currency for the nation, a currency that maintains its purchasing power. Obviously, the people of Sweden have not been illuminated by alternative currency reformers as to the nature of real currencies.

Perhaps, one day, an essay on what the government of Sweden do to maintain the purchasing power of theswedish crown ?
What do the Swiss government do to/for the swiss franc ?

Would the people of Sweden and Switzerland –if properly illuminated, enlightened and educated– give up their crowns and francs for notes that expire by the end of the week ?

And what will happen if there are savers who never spent their money and pile them up ? At some point in time they will hurt economy or will start to lent out their extra mutual credits at interest, because all other people will have reached their borrowing limit. The mutual credit system will convert to basic money system. If there is no demurage tax there is no reform.

>>>>How could this JAK bank exist if Silvio’s and Margaret’s bright idea was rampant ?
where did i say that ? (that Silvio copied the idea for the sake of selling books)

——–
So, if the whole country used a currency that requires a 1% stamp at the end of every week, and there were JAK banks all over, people, to maintain the purchasing power of their earnings, would deposit every unspent unit in a JAK. Is the purpose to prevent matress money savings ?

Why does Silvio want to artificially stimulate circulation ? and to prevent saving ?
Does he want everyone to become a stock-market or commodity-market or bond-market or real-estate gambler ?

—–
It is hypothetical, but i would put my money on people’s voting for swiss francs and not for Gesell notes

Telling the truth about conspiracists and their victims is not maligning; it is a public service

=====
Expiring and competing currencies all in one: the money of drunken sailors—

We now arrived at Brunswick, where we slept, taking the steam-boat the next morning for New York. In paying my bill, I received from the master of the house, some notes which, when I offered them in the steam-boat, I found had depreciated three or four per cent. within a distance of one mile. At this rate, thought I, before I get to New York they will be worth nothing. So I called for plenty of wine at dinner, in order that my money might not be lost.

Why do you want to artificially slow down circulation, rise interest rates and maintain economic rents [1] by enforcing a gold standard?

>> and to prevent saving ?

He didn’t want that.
When you loan (or deposit money in a bank), you’re saving. When you invest in producing goods (so called real capital) you’re saving too.
Since most savers pay far more interests during their lifetime (even if they never borrow) than they receive from their retirement savings, savers will have much more money to save [2]. He wants people to save more and be more wealthy in general.

>> Does he want everyone to become a stock-market or commodity-market or bond-market >> or real-estate gambler ?

Demurrage would hurt speculators heavily. There will be always arbitrage, but speculator very often take advantage very variable velocity of capital monies [3]. He wants the medium of exchange not to be blocked, that’s all. You gave a service to society and you will be rewarded back, fine. Now or in the future, but you may hurt the economy if it has to wait forever for you to decide. Spend, invest or lend. If you want to hoard that’s fine too, but hoard real goods and not a symbol of value (money). An island of people storing grain may resist a disaster better. An island storing gold has no insurance at all: it’s just an illusion.

Bank credit economies have a sawtooth output of inflation then depression. (Credit/Debt contracts collapse with asset grabs at bottom of cycle.) Gold based economies repeatedly depress as asset money hides and waits for goods producers to “give in.” A stamp script economy would tend to have velocity money always available in supply. So, a Gessel type steady state economy would change the dynamics, allowing available money to convert to assets readily. As the environment changes, so changes people’s psychology, and human security needs for storing money as an asset fades. For the people that must have precious metals, weights of metal would still be available for “asset” storage.

Anthony Migchels: “Most people would rather have interest free loans than interest on savings, especially if they actually did the math.”

————————————

Well, Leonardo Becchetti, professor in Economics at Tor Vergata University in Rome and chairman of the Ethics Committee of Banca Etica in Italy, apparently DID the math:

“We did some exercises on a typical JAK loan, including the loss of interest on post-savings. We got remarkable interest rates in about 10 – 15%. If we ask for a 10.000 Euro loan we have to save 10.000 Euro in JAK within a certain period (…) To me it seems a bit misleading to say that JAK works without using interest. In reality it is not like that.”

Yes, well…..I saw this film too. It’s by a mainstream economist and if there is anything we can learn from Murray and his buddies it is that these people’s thoughts can be quite…..incoherent.

Watching it I noticed that this man suggests that putting the money in the Jak bank misses income through interest and loses money to inflation. These two combined he puts at some 10%. He calls that interest too. However: interest is price for a loan measured in percentage points per year. So this clearly is not interest. It is a hidden cost.

More importantly: a typical JAK member saves as much as he borrows. When he borrows he does not pay interest and inflation eats away at the real value of the loan while he is paying it back. So when borrowing he is fully compensated for the hidden costs when saving. So the net cost of borrowing and saving is zero (except for the 22 euro membership fees).

There is no doubt in my mind that you saw through this obvious flaw in his reasoning just as quickly as I did, and undoubtedly you have the same innate distrust of mainstream banker apologists parading as ‘economists’, which leaves me at a loss understanding why you are putting this up? Could you elaborate?

“JAK requires its members to save to obtain the right to borrow. Savers are known to be good debtors.”

Anthony Migchels, November 3, 2012

“it is easy to conclude that saving money for future use is simply unsound approach, both from the perspective of the community and of the individual.”

Anthony Migchels, June 19, 2012

“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a “dismal science.” But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance”

It could be extremely popular in “Muslim” countries as current so called Islamic banking circumvents the usury label by applying other false labels to financial instruments that really incorporate interest.

If it were rolled out in Islamic countries, where people are naturally averse to usury and regulations tend to be less prohibitive in the banking sector – becoming a proven large scale success, it would certainly make for a compelling alternative “living” model…

Look, I did not link it but posted the details of the JAK bank and the short comings too.
You pooped pooped the concept with all it’s shot falls ignoring what I have all ready said.
Now I was surprised to see you have gone overboard.

There are similar British innovation that have operated successfully, again with it short falls.

Another model is being proposed by by friends in the US.

I go for Interest Free Loans issued by a publicly owned Central Bank for productive capacity.

You are also inclined to focus on one existing system, like most do. Which is a mistake, because none are perfect and a completely non usurious economy needs bits and pieces of several systems in hybrid kind of way.

the limitation of JAK as you described it is correct.

I’m not saying JAK is the ultimate solution: if you look into the interest free economics page you’ll see that I discuss just about every monetary point of view in a balanced way, pointing at both its merits and its limitations.

It should also be clear that I promote Mutual Credit as the basic tool for money creation.

Sorry I lost my cool,very unbecoming of a committed pacifist.
Sorry I lost my cool,very unbecoming of a committed pacifist.
More than than thirty years ago in fighting poverty,I was able to obtain foreign aid to Third World countries, but I knew there was more to it than aid or corruption. I tried to expose the shenanigans of the’ banksters’, I was nearly manhandled and had to lie low.
Until 2001 when at a public meeting at Quaker House in remembrance of a fellow pacifist, I predicted the impending crisis.This was the time of Regan/Thatcher /Greenspan.Milton Friedman
Fortunately there were Monetary Reformers who agreed with me, but admitted that they did not have the courage to say so in public.
From then onwards I have found fellow travellers on both sides of the Atlantic and elsewhere.
Having explored every possibilities of a viable solution the best I have concluded is an Interest Free Loans issued by a publicly owned Central Bank for productive capacity.No money for WARS
For a truly Free Market this is a sine qua non.NOT DEBT and COMPOUND Interest, this will help abolish poverty in the world including America and Europe.
Private banks are free to operate, but the Tax Payer is NEVER to bail them out, or the punters, if they gamble and lost.
IFL = Nil Inflation.
Money Supply is kept constant.
It’s self regulatory, no need for quangos to supervise.
Glad to say it’s gained ‘currency'(the dreaded full word again) on both sides of the Atlantic
My two penny worth

moneylender: Having explored every viable solution the best I have concluded is an Interest Free Loans issued by a publicly owned Central Bank for productive capacity. this will help abolish poverty in the world.
Jct: Agreed.
ML: Money Supply is kept constant.
Jct: No, no one knows how much collateral will be pledged to borrow the new chips. A casino bank isues interest-free currency but that doesn’t keep the chip supply constant, otehr than constantly equal to the collateral. The chips supply out on the casino floor varies all the time and yet works perfectly.

The casino chip example is wrong John: casino chips are backed by dollars. Should people bring their own, the casino bank would quickly be busted and there would be quick hyperinflation as the chips remaining in circulation would become worthless.

In fact: the chip example shows people will quickly print too much if they have a chance.

You know nothing about poker chips, do you? Anyway, the banking systems engineer just hasn’t got the time to waste on someone who can’t keep up. You keep making a fool of yourself talking about timebanks currency suffering inflation. I’ve done laughing you.

Ok, Poker chips are not backed of the word, but if people are allowed to bring their own chips they won’t be able to cash in: theyd bring far more than the casino can pay out.

So the example stands, you’ve done nothing to dispel the idea of inflation in hour based MC (let alone MC using national units as unit of account) except for claiming I’m stupid for suggesting its a problem if volume is not managed.

Your welcome to submit some real arguments any time and you know I love you so you’re also more than welcome to hang around laughing!

JAK Bank offers a welcome alternative to usury. Usury (charging interest on loans) is not a sustainable approach as more money must be repaid than is created.

It appears that JAK Banking is limited as full reserves must be maintained which I take to mean that if $10 million is lent, $10 million must be maintained as deposits. Do the depositors run the risk of losing instant access to their money or losing some portion upon loans that default?

Loans look to be recycled money with people effectively lending their money to others. Are JAK Banks able to create new money? If not, I don’t think we can consider them banks but rather money recyclers.

Basically, bank reserves are maintained for two reasons. First, some amount of money is required for banks to settle transaction accounts. And, second, some percentage of money is maintained in order to off-set loan defaults – the percentage is a function of risk analysis and defined under the various banking regulations.

A superior alternative should be developed whereby the bank is able to create new money based on the credit ability and collateral of the borrower. The borrower can supply their own “reserves” rather than relying on the bank or depositors. For example, on a mortgage; typically 4% is required (capital ratio) so the principal on a $100-k mortgage might be increased to $104-k. The additional money could be created as part of the loan (providing there is adequate collateral) or the borrower might provide the money which would be returned as the loan is repaid.

As part of the bank’s “service and transaction fees”, borrowing insurance could be offered to effectively eliminate long term risk from the bank.

The result would be an interest free loan and the subsequent borrowing costs would be greatly reduced. Equally important, the bank would not be limited by deposits as new capital would be added in proportion to the issuance of new loans – such a bank would be theoretically unlimited in its ability to issue new loans.

Of course, depositors would not be given any interest and people with extra money would be better served to invest their money instead in productive endeavors or to avoid debt altogether through cash payments or interest free debit accounts.